the university of california reporting & investigating improper governmental activities john...
TRANSCRIPT
The University of California
Reporting & Investigating Improper Governmental Activities
John Lohse – Director of InvestigationsJudith Rosenberg-Principal Investigator
Office of the SVP/Chief Compliance & Audit Officer of the Regents
http://ucwhistleblower.ucop.edu
The University of California
• Importance of Your Role• Who Investigates What?• UC Whistleblower Policies• Dos & Don’ts• Exercising Judgment
Agenda
December 2011 2UC Whistleblower Program
The University of California
Association of Certified Fraud Examiners’ CONCLUSION ON DETECTING FRAUD
“Occupational frauds are more likely to be detected by tips than by any other means” Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, 2010 Report to the Nation on Occupational Fraud and Abuse
December 2011
UC Whistleblower Program
3
The University of California
Policy on Reporting & Investigating Allegations of Suspected Improper
Governmental Activities
See overview of policies from BOI Pre Work
December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
4
The University of California
November 2010 UC Whistleblower Program
5
Fiscal Year 2010 - 2011
Investigations Summary
619 New Cases/689 Allegations* 277/45% UC Hotline, Anonymous Reporter 91/15% UC Hotline, Identified Reporter 61/10% Non-Hotline, Anonymous Reporter 190/30% Non-Hotline, Identified Reporter 428 Closed Cases** 62/15% Substantiated 138/32% Not Substantiated 228/53% Other Outcomes*** * A Case can include up to or more than 3 Allegations ** Closed Cases include related allegations *** Other Outcomes includes Not Specified, Inconclusive, Referred to Management, Frivolous Escalated to Campus Police, Escalated to Compliance, Escalated to HR/ELR, Investigated/Inconclusive Initiator Unwilling to Participate, Policy & Procedural Change Needed, Unable to Verify
The University of California
Who Performs Investigations?
December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
6
Academic PersonnelAnimal Research Office Disability CoordinatorEnvironmental Health &
SafetyHealth Sciences
Compliance OfficerHuman Resources
Labor Relations Employee Relations
EEO/AARisk ManagementStudent Judicial AffairsECAS Investigations
(UCOP)
Institutional Review BoardInternal AuditManagement overseeing ad
hoc external processesMedical StaffNCAA Compliance OfficerOffice of the General
CounselPrivilege & Tenure
CommitteeResearch AdministrationRetaliation Complaint OfficerTitle IX OfficerUniversity PoliceLDO Investigators
The University of California
Policy Objective
December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
7
To adhere to the spirit of the state whistleblower statutes by creating
1. an environment in which suspected improprieties are brought
forward without fear of retaliation
and 2. mechanisms that ensure
an appropriate institutional response to all suspected improprieties (not just whistleblower reports).
The University of California
Definitions
December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
8
Improper Governmental Act (IGA)
Any activity by a state agency or by an employeethat is undertaken in the performance of the employee’s
official duties, whether or not that action is within the scope of his or her employment,
and that (1) is in violation of any state or federal law or regulation
including, but not limited to, corruption, malfeasance, bribery, theft of government property, fraudulent claims, fraud, coercion, conversion, malicious prosecution, misuse of government property, or willful omission to perform duty
or (2)is economically wasteful, or involves gross misconduct, incompetence, or inefficiency.
The University of California
Definitions
December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
9
Protected Disclosure*: any good faith communication that
discloses or demonstrates an intention to disclose information that may evidence
1. an improper act or
2. any condition that may significantly threaten the health or safety of employees or the public
if the disclosure or intention to disclose was made for the purpose of remedying that condition.
*Not restricted to whistleblowers.
The University of California
Key ConceptsCan be in a variety of formsCan be to management OR any University official If not recognized as a IGA when made, danger of re-characterization as retaliation complaintMalicious intent does not nullify the potential validity of allegationsFrivolous complaints may themselves be IGAs
December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
10
The University of California
universityofcalifornia/edu.hotline report in English or Spanish 800.403.4744 – report in any language
December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
11
The University of California
Investigations Policy Overview
December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
12
Reporting to Locally Designated Official (LDO)
Triage Process by LDO and Investigations Work Group
(Two pronged test—“If True” & Sufficient Basis)
Investigation within natural jurisdictionOR
Referral to Management*
Communications, Coordination & Monitoring by LDO
Reporting to Management, IGA source & others as appropriate
* If the two criteria are not met— “If True” test and “Probable Cause” Standard
The University of California
13December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
Locally Designated OfficialsBerkeley – Linda WilliamsDavis – Wendi Delmendo
Irvine – Mike AriasMerced – Janet Young
Los Angeles – Bill CormierRiverside – William Kidder
San Diego – Gary MatthewsSan Francisco – Elizabeth BoydSanta Barbara – Ronald CortezSanta Cruz – Alison Galloway
Office of the President – Dan DooleyAgriculture & Natural Resources – Jake McGuire
Berkeley National Lab – Jim Krupnick
Locally Designated OfficialsBerkeley – Linda WilliamsDavis – Wendi Delmendo
Irvine – Mike AriasMerced – Janet Young
Los Angeles – Bill CormierRiverside – William Kidder
San Diego – Gary MatthewsSan Francisco – Elizabeth BoydSanta Barbara – Ronald CortezSanta Cruz – Alison Galloway
Office of the President – Dan DooleyAgriculture & Natural Resources – Jake McGuire
Berkeley National Lab – Jim Krupnick
Local Investigative BodiesAcademic Personnel Animal Research OfficeDisability Coordinator Environmental Health & SafetyHealth Sciences Compliance Officers Human ResourcesLabor Relations Employee RelationsEEO/AA Officer Risk ManagementStudent Judicial Affairs Institutional Review BoardInternal Audit Management/Ad Hoc ExternalMedical Staff NCAA Compliance OfficerOffice of the General Counsel Privilege & Tenure CommitteeResearch Administration Retaliation Complaint OfficerTitle IX Officer University Police
Local Investigative BodiesAcademic Personnel Animal Research OfficeDisability Coordinator Environmental Health & SafetyHealth Sciences Compliance Officers Human ResourcesLabor Relations Employee RelationsEEO/AA Officer Risk ManagementStudent Judicial Affairs Institutional Review BoardInternal Audit Management/Ad Hoc ExternalMedical Staff NCAA Compliance OfficerOffice of the General Counsel Privilege & Tenure CommitteeResearch Administration Retaliation Complaint OfficerTitle IX Officer University Police
InvestigationsWorkGroup
InvestigationsWorkGroup
The University of California
14
Reporting Criteria
Results from significant control or policy deficiency
Likely to receive media or other public attention
Involves misuse of University resources or creates exposure or liability in potentially significant amounts
Significant possibility of resulting from a criminal act
Involves significant threat to health or safety of employees and/or the public
Judged significant or sensitive for other reasonsDecember 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
The University of California
15
GuidanceAllegations – not just findings – are reportable.
Sensitivity and Media Attention override dollar impact.
Regents Audit Committee’s expectation: “No Surprises.”
Materiality Counts: balance bias towards disclosure against referrals to LDO for a missing “quart of strawberry ice cream.”
Remember that matters reported externally trigger internal reporting.December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
The University of California
16
When Confronted with Whistleblower Allegations
DosLearn UC Policy reporting channels
Locally Designated OfficialInternal Audit DirectorHuman Resources Director
Be alert to informal communications of allegations (protected disclosures)Contact Internal Audit and Human Resources before taking any personnel actionAct with speed and Hold the matter confidentialDecember 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
The University of California
When Confronted with Whistleblower Allegations
Don’tsDismiss the matter out of handLaunch your own investigationConfront the accused or otherwise tip them offDisclose the matter to any unnecessary partiesTry to settle or resolve the matter yourselfDecember 2011 UC Whistleblower
Program17
The University of California
18
Whistleblower Program Website
December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
The University of California
19
Case StudyA large University department has a small unit that operates fairly autonomously & with very limited oversight.
This unit is involved in procuring services from outside vendors and re-charging various University organizations.
December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
The University of California
20
Background
A temporary employee was assigned to assist with a backlog problem. This employee reported to her supervisor that a substantial amount of expenses had not been re-charged.
Senior department management became suspicious at this report and noticed that none of the bills for a particular vendor had been re-charged in over a year.
December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
The University of California
21
Decision Point1) Has a protected disclosure been made?
2) Does this matter meet the criteria for reporting to the LDO or another appropriate office?
December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
The University of California
22
Inquiry
The senior department manager called the phone number listed on the invoices and got an answering machine. The call was not returned. December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
The University of California
23
Drive By
The manager drove by the address on the invoice and found that it was a UPS mail box store.
December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
The University of California
24
ResearchThe manager called the Better Business Bureau and conducted a Dun & Bradstreet search without finding any information on the business.
December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
The University of California
25
Amount at Risk
The manager’s research found that the University had paid this vendor in excess of $250,000 over several years.
December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
The University of California
26
Considerations1) Did the manager go too far?
2) Is this matter now reportable to the LDO or another appropriate office?
3) What should the manager’s next steps be?December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
The University of California
27
Action PlanWith this information, the senior manager and another department supervisor confronted the employee on a Friday afternoon about the vendor and the failure to re-charge for their services. The employee was perceived as being evasive but did not admit to any wrongdoing. She was told to be available on Monday to go over in detail the operation of her unit.December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
The University of California
28
Reflection
1) Should the manager and the supervisor have confronted the employee with questions about the vendor and the failure to re-charge for the billed expenses?
2) Is this matter now reportable to the LDO or another appropriate office?
December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
The University of California
29
OutcomesOn Monday, the department found that all of the records in the unit had been removed over the weekend and information had been deleted from the employee’s computer.
The employee had left a message saying that she could be contacted through her attorney.
Then they called Internal Audit.
December 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
The University of California
30
ResourcesThe Education & Training Page of the Ethics, Compliance & Audit Services site includes case studies, slideshows & videos, under the Whistleblower Training section.
http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/compaudit/educationtrng.htmlDecember 2011 UC Whistleblower Program
The University of California
UC Whistleblower Program 31
Whistleblower Coordinator/Investigators
December 2011
UCB: Allan [email protected](510) 642-8471
UCD: Bruce [email protected](530) 754-6792
UCI: Kathie [email protected](949) 824-9166
UCLA: Chris [email protected](310) 267-5969
UCR: Elaine [email protected](951) 827-5034
UCSD: Christa [email protected](858) 534-1191
UCSF: Randy Otsuki [email protected] (415) 514-0439
UCSB: John [email protected](805) 893-4335
UCSC: Rita Walker [email protected] (831) 459-2462
LBNL: Meredith Montgomery [email protected] (510) 486-4453
ANR: Claudine [email protected] (530) 752-7496
UCOP: Irene Levintov(510) 987-9296Judith Rosenberg(510) 987-0650